Regulators should go beyond cost-benefit analysis and evaluate the distributional impacts of regulations.
Scholar argues for regulatory reforms grounded in an intense focus on net benefits.
The lives saved by four more weeks of social distancing requirements outweigh the harms to the economy.
The Trump Administration’s 1-in-2-out policy is more of an ineffective symbol than an action toward deregulation.
Regulators must measure welfare using transparent methods before determining the policies themselves.
Analysts debate how agencies should measure the benefits of reducing mortality.
It is time to reconsider the value of the VSL in policy analysis.
Setting a regulatory budget at a cost of zero ignores evidence of regulation’s high return on investment.
Scholar argues that the Trump Administration has discredited cost-benefit analysis.
Precise statutory language corresponds to better benefit-cost analysis and more consistent judicial review.
Scholars explore whether the benefits of the Clean Water Act justify its costs.
Regulatory benefit-cost analysis should account for people’s welfare, not just empirical data.